Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Reference: Fraleigh p. 58 Question 5.43 in A First Course in Abstract Algebra

Let $G$ be an Abelian Group. Suppose $H$ and $K$ are subgroups of $G$, and $HK = \{ xy: x \in H \text{ and } y \in K \}$. Prove that $HK$ is a subgroup of $G$.

Since $H$ and $K$ are both subgroups, $e \in H$ and $e \in K$. $ee \in HK$ which shows that $HK$ is not empty.

(i). Let $ab, cd \in HK$ such that $a, c \in H$ and $b, d \in K$. First I need to show that $abcd$ can be written as a product of elements of $H$ and elements of $K$. Since $G$ is Abelian, $abcd = acbd = (ac)(bd)$. We know that $(ac) \in H$ and $(bd) \in K$.

(ii). Let $ab \in HK$, then $a \in H, b \in K$. I need to show that $(ab)^{-1} \in HK$ can be written as a product of elements of $H$ and $K$. Because $a \in H$ and $H$ is a subgroup, $a^{-1} \in H$. And since $b \in K$ and $K$ is a subgroup, $b^{-1} \in K$. $(ab)^{-1} = b^{-1}a^{-1}$.

Am I interpreting the question correctly? And is my proof correct?


@Arturo's Exercise:

I'm a bit confused as to the definition of $HK = KH$ given. I thought that if two groups $A$ and $B$ were equal, every element of $A$ would be contained in $B$ and every element of $B$ would be contained in $A$.

(i). Let $ab, cd \in HK$, then $abcd \in HK$. I need to show that $abcd \in HK$. Using the definition above, $ab = b'a'$ and $ab = a''b''$ where $a', a'' \in H$ and $b', b'' \in K$. A similar statement can be made for $cd$.

(ii). Let $ab \in HK$, then $(ab)^{-1} \in HK$

Could I get a hint as to how to start part (i)? I've tried substituting to try and show that $abcd$ is a product of elements of $H$ and $K$, but I have not gotten anywhere.

share|improve this question
5  
Yes, your proof is fine (strictly, you could make it more complete by explicitly noting that $b^{-1}a^{-1} = a^{-1}b^{-1}$ as $G$ is abelian, putting the element in the right form to be in $HK$). –  Geoff Robinson Aug 12 '11 at 20:51
    
@Jon: It seems you misunderstood/are confused about the "exercise" I wrote below. If $A$ and $B$ are subsets of $G$, then $AB$ is the subset of all products of the form $ab$ with $a\in A$, $b\in B$. For example, in $S_3$, if $A=\{(1,3), (1,2,3)\}$ and $B=\{(1,2),(1,3)\}$, then $AB=\{(1,3)(1,2), (1,3)(1,3), (1,2,3)(1,2), (1,2,3)(1,3)\} = \{(1,2,3), I, (1,3), (2,3)\}$. If $H$ and $K$ are subgroups, then they are also subsets, so you can consider the set $HK$. It may or may not be a sub group. The exercise is to show exactly when it is a subgroup, and it is a set-theoretic condition. –  Arturo Magidin Aug 16 '11 at 16:45

1 Answer 1

up vote 8 down vote accepted

The last part, as Geoff notes, is perhaps a bit lacking: you did not show that $b^{-1}a^{-1}$ is an element of $HK$, because that requires you to show that it can be written as the product of something in $H$ times something in $K$, rather than "something in $K$ times something in $H$" (yes, they are the same because $G$ is abelian, but this needs to be said somewhere).

Now, for further practice, you can try the usual problem:

Let $G$ be a group, not necessarily abelian, and let $H$ and $K$ be subgroups. Prove that $HK=\{ hk\mid h\in H,\ k\in K\}$ is a subgroup of $G$ if and only if $HK$ and $KH$ are equal as sets.

(Note that $HK=KH$ means that for each $h\in H$ and $k\in K$ there exist $h',h''\in H$ and $k',k''$ in $K$ such that $hk=k'h'$ and $kh = h''k''$. We do not require $hk=kh$ for each $h\in H$ and $k\in K$.)


Let $G$ be a group. If $A$ and $B$ are subsets of $G$, then we can form the subset $AB$, $$AB = \{ab\mid a\in A, b\in B\}.$$

For example, take $G=S_3$, $A=\{(1,2), (1,3)\}$, $B=\{(1,2,3),(1,3,2)\}$. Then $$AB = \{(1,2)(1,2,3), (1,2)(1,3,2), (1,3)(1,2,3), (1,3)(1,3,2)\} = \{(2,3), (1,3), (1,2)\}.$$

If $H$ and $K$ are subgroups of $G$, then $HK$ may or may not be a subgroup (it's certainly a subset). For instance, if $G=S_3$, $H=\{I,(1,2)\}$, $K=\{I,(1,3)\}$, then $$\begin{align*} HK &= \{II, I(1,3), (1,2)I, (1,2)(1,3)\}\\ &= \{I, (1,3), (1,2), (1,3,2)\}, \end{align*}$$ which is not a subgroup, since it is not closed under products or inverses. On the other hand, if $H=\{I,(1,2)\}$ and $K=\{I, (1,2,3), (1,3,2)\}$, then $$\begin{align*} HK &= \{II, I(1,2,3), I(1,3,2), (1,2)I, (1,2)(1,2,3), (1,2)(1,3,2)\}\\ &= \{I, (1,2,3), (1,32), (1,2), (2,3), (1,3)\}\end{align*}$$ which is a subgroup (in fact, it's the entire group).

Now, in the first example above, with $H=\{I, (1,2)\}$ and $K=\{I, (1,3)\}$, we can also construct $KH$. We have: $$\begin{align*} KH &= \{II, I(1,2), (1,3)I, (1,3)(1,2)\}\\ &= \{I, (1,2), (1,3), (1,2,3)\}.\end{align*}$$ Notice that $KH$ is not equal to $HK$: $KH$ contains $(1,2,3)$, which is not in $HK$.

Now look at the second example above, with $K=\{I, (1,2,3), (1,3,2)\}$ and $H=\{I, (1,2)\}$. We have: $$\begin{align*} KH &= \{ II, I(1,2), (1,2,3)I, (1,2,3)(1,2), (1,3,2)I, (1,3,2)(1,2)\}\\ &= \{I, (1,2), (1,2,3), (1,3), (1,3,2), (2,3)\}.\end{align*}$$ Here, $KH$ is equal to $HK$. However, also notice that it is not true that $hk=kh$ for each $h\in H$ and $k\in K$. $(1,3)$ is in both $HK$ and in $KH$, but $(1,3)$ appears in $HK$ as the product $(1,2)(1,3,2)$, whereas it appears in $KH$ as the product $(1,2,3)(1,2)$ (different $h$).

The proposition I suggest is asking you to prove that if the set $HK$ is equal to the set $KH$, then $HK$ is a subgroup; and conversely, that if $HK$ is a subgroup, then the set $HK$ must be equal to the set $KH$.

Now, what are you assuming in (i)? That the sets are equal, or that $HK$ is a subgroup?

If we assume that $HK$ is a subgroup, that means that (i) it contains $e$; (ii) it is closed under products; and (iii) it is closed under inverses. Your objective is to show that $HK=KH$. In order to show that $HK=KH$, you need to show that $HK\subseteq KH$ and that $KH\subseteq HK$.

So, in order to show that $HK\subseteq KH$, you need to show that if you have $x\in HK$, then $x\in KH$. So, let $x\in HK$. That means that there exist $h\in H$ and $k\in K$ such that $x=hk$. What you need to show is that $x\in KH$; that is, you need to show that there exists $k'\in K$ and $h'\in H$ (it's possible that $k=k'$, but then again it's possible that $k\neq k'$; we don't know!) such that $x=k'h'$.

Well... we know that $HK$ is a subgroup of $G$. Since $x\in HK$, then we must have $x^{-1}\in HK$; that means that there exist $h''\in H$ and $k''\in K$ such that $x^{-1}=h''k''. Therefore...

Now finish this part of the argument, and then show that $KH\subseteq HK$.

Conversely, you need to show that if $HK=KH$, then $HK$ is a subgroup. You need to show that: (i) $e\in HK$ (easy, since $H$ and $K$ are both subgroups); (ii) that if $x,y\in HK$, then $xy\in HK$; and (iii) that if $x\in HK$, then $x^{-1}\in HK$.

Well, for (iii), for example: suppose that $x\in HK$. Since $x\in HK=KH$, then there exist $h\in H$ and $k\in K$ such that $x=kh$. What is $x^{-1}$? Is it in $HK$? Etc. Finish this off.

share|improve this answer
    
Look above at my question ^ –  Student Aug 16 '11 at 16:45

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.